Abstract
Bladder cancer (BC) is classified as a high-risk tumour type for venous thromboembolism (VTE). VTE presents an extra challenge in the management of patients with cancer, given the increase in morbidity and mortality on having both conditions.
To summarise the contemporary evidence on the VTE rate in patients with BC according to the stage, type of anti-cancer treatment and highlight VTE rate in the UK and other countries. A systematic review was carried out, and an electronic search for publications between January 2000 and November 2021 was done. Studies recording VTE in BC patients were included, whilst paediatric patients, case reports, studies reporting on a mix of arterial and venous thrombosis, studies reporting DVT or PE only and recorded hospitalised VTE only were excluded. The rate of VTE, country of origin, risk factors and thromboprophylaxis duration for VTE in BC patients were identified.
A total of 38 papers met the search criteria. All publications were original research papers (cohort studies). The overall VTE rate in patients with BC was estimated at 1.9% to 4.7%. For those patients undergoing cystectomy, the VTE rate ranged from 3% to 17.6%; however, the VTE rate in the metastatic stage of BC patients ranged from 3.1% to 5.1%.
The rates of VTE in BC patients are high, further increased by interventions such as surgery and chemotherapy. Thromboprophylaxis measures should be optimised. This review highlighted the fact that the VTE rate in BC varies between studies due to the heterogeneity of risk factors reported.
Keywords: chemotherapy, cystectomy, bladder cancer, cancer, thrombosis, venous thromboembolism
Introduction and background
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a disorder in which a thrombus forms, mostly in the deep veins of the lower or upper limbs, and is called deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The thrombus may travel to the pulmonary arteries where it lodges, causing a pulmonary embolism (PE). Together, DVT and PE are known as VTE. Cancer is an independent risk factor for VTE [1], and VTE is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer [2]. VTE negatively affects the quality of life and increases the risk of further complications such as recurrent VTE and bleeding [3]. In addition, the utilisation of health care resources in cancer patients who have VTE is high [3]. Cancer patients have a five to six-fold increased risk of developing VTE compared with the general population; this can reach seven-fold for cancers of the brain, ovary and pancreas [4]. The pathogenesis of VTE in cancer patients is complex, related to the interaction between the procoagulant properties of the malignant cells themselves, the haemostatic system and characteristics of the patient [5].
BC is categorised as a high-risk tumour type (for VTE) [6]. These authors found the six-month cumulative incidence of VTE in metastatic urothelial BC is 8.2%. VTE rates in patients with BC who have had a cystectomy range between 0.3% and 17.6% [7-8]. Furthermore, in a USA study, exploring VTE in BC patients, the VTE rate was 7.5% (5.5-9.9%) in USA and 3.8% (2.5-5.4%) in non-USA countries, P = 0.005. The standard treatment for muscle-invasive non-metastatic bladder cancer is cystectomy or multimodality treatment (surgery - transurethral resection of bladder tumour plus chemo-radiotherapy). Muscle-invasive BC is proven to increase the risk of VTE, and this risk becomes even higher after cystectomy [9].
This systematic review was undertaken to summarise the contemporary evidence on the VTE rate in patients with BC according to the type of anti-cancer treatment and highlight the VTE rate in the UK vs other countries.
The risk of VTE in BC may vary between different countries due to different guidelines followed in BC management, e.g. European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines are generally used in Europe, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines are used internationally, in particular in the USA and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines are used in the UK, for example, using neoadjuvant chemotherapy or not before cystectomy. Different treatment regimens are preferred in different countries, e.g., the USA and using thromboprophylaxis for 14 or 28 days post cystectomy [10].
BC patients who are undergoing major surgery, e.g., radical cystectomy, are particularly at high risk for VTE; thus, most guidelines recommend pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for patients starting before surgery and continuing for four weeks post-surgery. Thromboprophylaxis for ambulatory BC patients who are receiving chemotherapy is not widely adopted or recommended by guidelines unless the patients have other risk factors [10].
It is important to have evidence on VTE incidence in patients with BC according to known confounding variables for VTE, in the UK and other countries, so that healthcare professionals and patients are informed and can take appropriate action. In practice, optimizing treatment plans to decrease VTE risk while also reducing bleeding risk is significant to patients and the healthcare system; thus, the decision to use pharmacological thromboprophylaxis needs a balance between the risk of VTE and major bleeding [11].
The clinician needs to consider the balance between the risk of VTE and the risk of bleeding before prescribing pharmacological thromboprophylaxis [9]. This systematic review also reveals the rate of VTE in BC patients according to the treatments and length of thromboprophylaxis in the UK and other countries to inform the optimisation of thromboprophylaxis
Aims and objectives of systematic review
Aims
The aims of this review are to find (a) the incidence rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) according to the anti-cancer treatments received, in and out of the UK; (b) the VTE rate differences between the UK and global data.
Objectives
To explore (a) the VTE rate in BC patients in the UK and other countries; (b) the evidence available on VTE rate in non-muscle-invasive, muscle-invasive, and metastatic BC patients in the UK and non-UK countries; (c) the influence of the duration of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis on VTE rate in patients with BC undergoing cystectomy; (d) the knowledge gaps of VTE in BC that demand further studies in the UK and non-UK countries.
Methods for systematic review
The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Healthcare (CRD, 2008) was utilised to guide this systematic review. A search was conducted on the PubMed and Embase electronic databases (Appendix 1). In addition, conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Urological Association, the two largest international meetings of cancer and urology, were screened for potentially relevant records.
Search inclusion and exclusion criteria
The main outcome of interest was any VTE, which included symptomatic or incidentally detected DVT and PE, diagnosed in patients with BC.
Inclusion criteria included (a) Primary research that confirmed the diagnosis of DVT and/or PE in BC patients; (b) Papers in the English language; (c) Papers published from January 2000 until November 2021.
Exclusion criteria included: (a) Case reports; (b) Studies reporting DVT or PE only; (c) Studies that recorded in-hospital VTE only; (d) Studies occasionally reporting on VTE as one of the adverse effects of surgery or chemotherapy; (e) Studies reporting on a mix of arterial and venous thrombosis as a composite endpoint or lack of clarity on venous thrombosis only.
Data sources and searches
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and checklist were followed to develop this review [12]. The following terms were used: ((‘bladder cancer’ OR bladder carcinoma’ OR ‘bladder tumour’ OR ‘bladder urothelial carcinoma’ OR ‘transitional cell carcinoma’) AND (‘VTE’ OR ‘DVT’ OR ‘PE’ OR ‘venous thromboembolism’ OR ‘thrombosis’ OR ‘thromboembolism’ OR ‘deep vein thrombosis’ OR ‘pulmonary embolism’ OR ‘lung embolism’)).
Publications from January 2000 to June 2020 were included (Appendix 1). Data on overall VTE incidence in BC patients were extracted from all related publications. These were the source data for the primary objective - incidence of VTE in BC patients. Reference list checking was carried out to identify further relevant studies. All titles and abstracts from the search were evaluated independently by two reviewers (DP and IM) and disagreements were resolved by a third arbitrator (AY).
Study quality assessment for systematic review
For each of the included studies, the risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) standards and classified as good, fair, and poor. The NOS assigns up to a maximum of nine points for the least risk of bias in three domains: 1) selection of study groups (four points); 2) comparability of groups (two points); and 3) ascertainment of exposure and outcomes (three points) for cohort studies.
A maximum score of 2 can be awarded for comparability and a maximum score of 1 can be given for each of the remaining points. A study can have the maximum possible quality score of 9. Thresholds for converting the NOS to AHRQ standards were applied to have a clear view of quality assessment for each study (Appendix 2).
Ethical considerations for systematic review
Ethics committee approval was not required for this systematic review, as this methodology utilises only previously published material, is not primary research and does not involve humans or data collection.
Review
Results of the systematic review
Descriptive Characteristics
Of the 2921 publications, a total of 38 studies met the inclusion criteria and were selected for this systematic review. All stages of the extraction process are shown in the PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Study selection process of systematic review.
In the current systematic review, all papers with one exception have good and fair quality according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and AHRQ standards. All publications were original research papers (cohort studies) in which the VTE rate was clearly stated. The cohort studies were generated in different countries: ‘USA’, ‘Canada’, ‘Germany’, ‘France’, ‘Denmark’, ‘Netherlands’, ‘UK’, ‘Australia’, ‘Turkey’, and ‘Egypt’. The majority of the studies were carried out in the USA. The country of origin is summarised in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Summary of studies according to country of origin.
The majority of papers included patients who had undergone cystectomy (n=33) (Figure 3). The further risk of VTE in patients receiving neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy (with curative intent) was only mentioned in four of the 33 papers [13-16]. There are no data on VTE in patients having multimodality treatments. Only two papers discussed the VTE risk in patients receiving chemotherapy only [17-18]; two papers compared VTE rates in using thromboprophylaxis (TP) for two weeks and an extended duration of four weeks [19-20]; one paper included patients having a transurethral resection bladder tumour (TURBT) only [21].
Figure 3. Summary of VTE and BC studies by treatment.
VTE: venous thromboembolism; BC: bladder cancer
VTE rate in patients with bladder cancer
This review identified 38 studies specifying the VTE rate in BC patients, with a total of 172,380 BC patients being included, according to the type of treatments (Figure 3) and country of origin; however, two studies stated the overall VTE rate with no data on anti-cancer therapies or TP regimes [22-23]. A cohort study conducted in the UK explored the VTE rate in all cancer patients, including 3152 BC patients, and the absolute rate per 1000 person-years of VTE in BC was 15 [24]. In the US, Sandhu et al. (2010) carried out a retrospective cohort study for 24,861 patients with BC to look at the VTE rate over six years. The one-year and two-year rate of VTE after cancer diagnosis was 1.6% and 1.9%, respectively [22]. Taking both studies together, VTE rates in BC patients were an average of 1.9% to 4.7% (mean = 3.3%) within two years of BC diagnosis. The VTE rate in BC patients in the UK was more than double in the USA.
VTE rate in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer undergoing transurethral resection bladder tumour: The effect of minimally invasive surgery, TURBT, on the VTE rate in BC patients has rarely been investigated. A single study used the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database, which explored the VTE rate in patients who had TURBT for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer patients. The study reviewed data from 1988 to 2009 for 50,125 patients treated with TURBT; 2.8% of patients experienced VTE within 90 days post-TURBT [21]. In non-muscle-invasive BC undergoing TURBT, no thromboprophylaxis was utilised due to a lack of evidence on the VTE risk as well as concerns around bleeding.
VTE in patients with bladder cancer undergoing cystectomy: The data from 33 studies of patients with BC undergoing cystectomy (invasive surgery) were extracted to find the rate of VTE in patients undergoing cystectomy alone and patients having a cystectomy plus chemotherapy and in and out with the UK. The VTE rates at different time points post-cystectomy were identified: 30 days, 90 days, 180 days, one year or two years. All studies included found an elevated risk of VTE among patients undergoing cystectomy. The rates of VTE in BC patients who had cystectomy were between 1.3% and 23.2% (mean=4.9%). In the UK, two studies explored the rate of VTE in patients undergoing cystectomy and the VTE rates were 2.5% and 2.9% mean=2.7% [25-26]. Three Canadian studies and one from Turkey demonstrated a VTE rate of BC patients treated with chemotherapy and cystectomy of between 1.3% and 9% (mean=5.1%). There were no studies that explored the VTE rate in BC patients having cystectomy and chemotherapy.
Regarding thromboprophylaxis post-cystectomy, 30 studies did not clearly discuss thromboprophylaxis regimens for BC patients undergoing cystectomy. However, two studies from the USA explored thromboprophylaxis effectiveness in BC patients with cystectomy in the post-surgical period. These two studies grouped patients by receiving thromboprophylaxis for 14 days or 28 days post-cystectomy. The patients were followed for 90 days duration. A substantial reduction in VTE rate (from 17.6% to 5%) was recorded in the extended thromboprophylaxis (28 days) group in comparison to the control group (14 days); extended chemoprophylaxis significantly reduced the incidence of VTE (P-value=0.021) [20]. No UK studies explored the impact of using extended thromboprophylaxis on the VTE rate in BC patients who have had cystectomy.
VTE in bladder cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: Only two studies exploring the VTE in muscle-invasive BC who received chemotherapy were found, and the VTE rates were 5.1% and 8.1% (mean=6.6%) [17-18]. The VTE rate within six months from diagnosis of metastatic urothelial cancer (not specifically bladder cancer) is 3.2%, and the VTE rate in metastatic urothelial cancer and receiving chemotherapy is 5.1% [18]. No data exclusively relating to patients with BC who have had chemotherapy only were found to assess the benefits or drawbacks of thromboprophylaxis in this population.
The mean of VTE rates in BC patients who had undergone radical cystectomy in the UK was lower than in non-UK countries as a group (Figure 4).
Figure 4. Mean of VTE rates of BC patients who have had cystectomy in the UK and other countries.
VTE: venous thromboembolism
Discussion of the systematic review
This review explored the mean of VTE rates within and outside the UK and found the difference with the mean of VTE rates in non-UK countries according to the types of treatments or VTE risk factors in patients with BC. The VTE rates were explored in BC patients according to the risk factors impacting the rate of VTE such as surgery, chemotherapy and thromboprophylaxis in the UK and non-UK countries, where possible.
The review of the VTE rate in patients with BC elicited 38 prospective and retrospective studies that demonstrated VTE rates in different follow-up periods among BC patients who have had a radical cystectomy. Each study has a different rate of VTE and therefore a wide range of VTE rates in patients having cystectomy is noted (1.3% to 23.2%) in this current review. Regarding UK studies, they were only two studies that collected data on the VTE rate in BC patients who have had cystectomy in the UK, and these studies were carried out some years ago (2012 and 2013). Hence, due to the lack of new and enough studies (more than four studies) in recent years, it would be unlikely to be beneficial to carry out a meta-analysis of VTE rate in BC patients based on country (the UK vs non-UK countries). It is important to undertake new studies exploring the VTE rate in BC patients in the UK.
A previous systematic review was carried out on the risk of VTE and bleeding in patients having open radical cystectomy [9]. Many studies included in Tikkinen’s systematic review were occasionally reported the VTE rate as one of the adverse effects of surgery, and it seems that these studies did not check for VTE events carefully. These data may be at risk of information bias [9].
There are many possible explanations for the large variations in the rates of VTE observed within this group: for example, the heterogeneity of risk factors in this population that could affect the rate of VTE such as minimal invasive (robotic) cystectomy or open radical cystectomy [10]. Additionally, 33 of the included studies did not state, discuss or categorise BC patients according to confounding factors that alter the rate of VTE such as receiving surgical thromboprophylaxis for 14 or 28 days, which then makes it difficult to compare rates between studies [13,15-16,25-39,40-53]. All included studies, with the exception of two [19-20], did not clearly discuss or state the thromboprophylaxis measures employed. Having different thromboprophylaxis protocols may be the cause of variation in VTE rate between studies and countries using extended thromboprophylaxis 28 days post-surgery decrease the VTE rate in BC patients with cystectomy.
The timing of follow-up differs between surgical studies. The minimum follow-up duration of patients undergoing cystectomy was 28 days, and the VTE rates were 3% -7.7% (mean=5.6%). In this review, we excluded studies that only drew on data relating to VTE during in-hospital admission because the vast majority of VTEs (82.6%) occur after discharge from the hospital; in other words, there was an inadequate follow-up for VTE in patients undergoing cystectomy [28]. In our current review, the data from three studies that followed up the patients for three months after cystectomy revealed that VTE rates were still high; this may be due to patients having further treatment and hospitalisation [15,18,50]. According to the study by Wallis et al. (2017), the VTE rate peaks at 20 days after cystectomy in BC patients; however, patients continue to be at risk of VTE long after surgery [16]. As found in this review, BC patients who had undergone cystectomy have an elevated risk of VTE for up to three months after surgery [13]. Consideration should thus be given to offering thromboprophylaxis measures and caring for longer than 28 days post cystectomy, in particular, if chemotherapy has been added to the treatment plan or patients have other risk factors for VTE. The majority of BC guidelines typically suggest extended thromboprophylaxis for pelvic surgery, including cystectomy for up to four weeks post‐discharge [51]. Interestingly, the mean of VTE rates in patients who have had cystectomy with chemotherapy is 5.0% [13,15,34], suggesting that systemic chemotherapy did not increase the VTE rate more than the already increased rate imposed by surgery.
Brennan and his team (2018) also mentioned that chemotherapy is not associated with an increased risk of VTE after RC [15]. The presence of metastatic disease increases the VTE rate to the same extent as cystectomy by 5.1% [15]. However, patients with metastatic BC who did not receive chemotherapy had an absolute VTE incidence rate of 3.2% [18]. The VTE rate in patients with metastatic BC who receive systemic chemotherapy further increased to 5.1% within six months. VTE rates based on the chemotherapy group demonstrated no statistical difference when gemcitabine/cisplatin was used as the comparator [18].
Gopalakrishna et al. (2016) mentioned that the VTE rate differed significantly by country of origin among BC patients [53]. This is likely to be due to differences in patients’ characteristics, using preoperative chemotherapy, recording issues and using different protocols of thromboprophylaxis. Thus, it is of value to find the VTE rate in the UK and not depend on the data from non-UK countries, in order to scope the problem and strive to protect the patients from this debilitating condition. The VTE rates were 2.5% and 2.9% within one-year post-cystectomy as the UK study found [25-26].
Table 1 lists the studies that provided information on the VTE rate in bladder cancer patients receiving thromboprophylaxis while Table 2 lists those included information on the VTE rate in bladder patients undergoing cystectomy and/or chemotherapy treatment.
Table 1. VTE rate in bladder cancer patients receiving thromboprophylaxis.
TP: thromboprophylaxis; ETP: extended thromboprophylaxis; Cyst.: cystectomy; VTE: venous thromboembolism
| References | Study origin | VTE rate (%) with ETP | VTE rate (%) without ETP | Follow-up (days) | Enrolment period | Participants | Type of study | Interventions | Quality |
| Schomburg et al. [20] | USA | 5 | 17.6 | 90 | 2012-2015 | 79-51 | Retrospective | Cyst. ± TP | Good |
| Pariser et al. [19] | USA | 5 | 12 | 90 | 2011- 2014 | 402-234 | Retrospective | Cyst. ± TP | Good |
Table 2. Studies included information on VTE rate in bladder patients undergoing cystectomy and/or chemotherapy treatment.
CT: chemotherapy; Cyst.: cystectomy, NCT: neoadjuvant chemotherapy; INT: international; TURBT: transurethral resection bladder tumour; ACT: adjuvant chemotherapy: NA: not applicable; VTE: venous thromboembolism
| References | Study origin | VTE rate (%) | Follow-up (days) | Enrolment period | Participants | Study type | Intervention | Quality |
| De Martino et al. [27] | USA | 4.9 | 30 | 2007- 2009 | 307 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Alberts et al. [28] | USA | 5.5 | 30 | 2005- 2012 | 2065 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Soave et al. [29] | Germany | 3 | 30 | 2007- 2014 | 201 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Poor |
| Vukina et al. [30] | USA | 5.7 | 30 | 2005- 2011 | 878 | Prospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Mossanen et al. [31] | USA | 5.5 | 30 | 2007- 2012 | 8671 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Chen Emily et al. [32] | Australia | 7.7 | 30 | 2009- 2013 | 53 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Lyon et al. [33] | USA | 4.2 | 30 | 2011- 2016 | 8241 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Van Dlac & Cowan [34] | USA | 6.0 | 30 | 2005- 2011 | 1307 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Good |
| Zaffuto et al. [21] | USA | 2.8 | 90 | 1988- 2009 | 50125 | Retrospective | TURBT | Good |
| Daneshmand et al. [35] | USA | 5.4 | 30 | 2011-2012 | 110 | Prospective | Cyst. | Good |
| Cookson et al. [36] | USA | 1.3 | 30 | 1995-2000 | 304 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Poor |
| Breau et al. [37] | USA | 3.2 | 30 | 2006-2012 | 2303 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Tyson et al. [38] | USA | 6.8 | 30 | 2005-2011 | 1792 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Good |
| De Vries et al. [39] | Netherlands | 2.3 | 30 | 2007-2008 | 85 | Prospective | Cyst. | Good |
| Nguyen et al. [14] | Turkey | 1.3 | 30 | 2011-2015 | 74 | Prospective | Cyst. + CT | Poor |
| Brossner et al. [40] | Austria | 3.2 | 30 | 1998-2002 | 92 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Hugen et al. [41] | USA | 4.4 | 90 | 1985 - 2015 | 2694 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Dorion et al. [13] | Canada | 5.4 | 90 | 1994 - 2008 | 3879 | Retrospective | Cyst. + CT | Good |
| Sun et al. [42] | USA | 4.7 | 90 | 1971-2012 | 2316 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Good |
| Khan et al. [26] | UK | 2.5 | 90 | 2003-2008 | 158 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Good |
| Fairey et al. [43] | Canada | 3.5 | 90 | 2000-2006 | 314 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Good |
| James et al. [44] | USA | 6.3 | 90 | 2008-2010 | 2565 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Good |
| Laymon et al. [45] | Egypt | 4 | 90 | 2004-2014 | 1737 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Good |
| Brennan et al. [15] | Canada | 9 | 180 | 1994-2013 | 4205 | Retrospective | Cyst. + CT | Good |
| Ramos et al. [18] | USA | 5.1 | 180 | 2000-2013 | 1762 | Retrospective Cohort | CT | Good |
| Khafagy et al. [46] | Egypt | 3.3 | 180 | 1999-2001 | 60 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Khorana et al. [17] | USA | 8.2 | 360 | 2004- 2009 | 2001 | Retrospective | CT | Good |
| Dyer et al. [25] | UK | 2.9 | 360 | 2009 - 2010 | 1641 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Ording et al. [47] | Denmark | 3.3 | 360 | 1995 - 2011 | 13809 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Wallis et al. [16] | Canada | 4.5 | 720 | 2002 - 2014 | 3623 | Retrospective | Cyst. + CT | Fair |
| Walker et al. [24] | UK | 1.5 | 720 | 1987 - 2012 | 3152 | Retrospective | NA | Fair |
| Sandhu et al. [48] | USA | 1.9 | 720 | 1993-95 & 97-99 | 24861 | Retrospective | NA | Fair |
| Berneking et al. [49] | USA | 10.3 | ------ | 2000-2010 | 359 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Mendiola et al. [50] | USA | 2.3 | ---- | 1995-2003 | 42 | Retrospective | Cyst. | poor |
| Clement et al. [51] | France | 23.2 | --- | 2005-2009 | 86 | Retrospective | Cyst. | Fair |
| Cardenas-Turanzas et al. [52] | USA | 1.4 | --- | 2000-2003 | 1493 | Retrospective | Cyst. | poor |
The VTE rate in BC patients varies according to the type of treatment and the use of thromboprophylaxis. Additionally, the mean of VTE rates in BC patients in the UK is lower than the mean of non-UK countries, which indicates that there is a variation in VTE rates in BC patients between the UK and non-UK countries (Figure 4).
According to the author, the VTE rate in BC patients in the UK seems lower than that of non-UK countries, perhaps due to the extended thromboprophylaxis regimens applied post-cystectomy. More data in the UK are required to document the VTE rate in patients who have had a cystectomy and patients treated with cystectomy and chemotherapy. This current review has some limitations, however, as many studies included did not report all variables of interest, e.g., thromboprophylaxis measures and chemotherapy prescribed, but mainly reported VTE rate and the country origin of study. The strengths of this current systematic review include the comprehensive search strategy, the risk of bias assessment and exploring other risk factors for VTE in the BC population.
In summary, this review found the VTE rates in patients with BC who have had cystectomy or chemotherapy are around 2.7% and 5.2%, respectively. There are no data on VTE in BC patients who have had radiotherapy, and very limited data regarding VTE in BC patients who have had cystectomy and chemotherapy in the UK. No data explored the radiotherapy risk factors for the VTE in BC patients.
Conclusions
This review highlights the fact that the VTE rate in BC varies between studies due to the heterogeneity of risk factors (cystectomy, chemotherapy and thromboprophylaxis) reported. The mean of VTE rates in BC patients who have had cystectomy in the UK seems lower than in non-UK countries. In the UK, there are only two studies that explored the VTE incidence in patients with BC. BC patients have variable regimens and drugs for thromboprophylaxis. VTE rates in patients with BC are affected by the duration of thromboprophylaxis in patients who have had cystectomy. Given the VTE rates in this review, longer-term thromboprophylaxis should be considered postoperatively, so this study supports extended anti-clotting prophylaxis in patients undergoing cystectomy.
Further studies to explore the VTE rate in patients with BC, undergoing cystectomy or receiving multimodality bladder preservation treatment, should be carried out in the UK, to garner more robust data to better protect patients from this debilitating condition.
Appendices
Appendix 1: Sample of search of systematic review
Figure 5. Sample of search of systematic review.
Appendix 2: Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment form for cohort studies
Note: A study can be given a maximum of one star for each numbered item within the Selection and Outcome categories. A maximum of two stars can be given for Comparability.
Selection
1) Representativeness of the exposed cohort
a) Truly representative (one star)
b) Somewhat representative (one star)
c) Selected group
d) No description of the derivation of the cohort
2) Selection of the non-exposed cohort
a) Drawn from the same community as the exposed cohort (one star)
b) Drawn from a different source
c) No description of the derivation of the non-exposed cohort
3) Ascertainment of exposure
a) Secure record (e.g., surgical record) (one star)
b) Structured interview (one star)
c) Written self-report
d) No description
e) Other
4) Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at the start of the study
a) Yes (one star)
b) No
Comparability
1) Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis controlled for confounders
a) The study controls for age, sex and marital status (one star)
b) Study controls for other factors (list) _________________________________ (one star)
c) Cohorts are not comparable on the basis of the design or analysis controlled for confounders
Outcome
1) Assessment of outcome
a) Independent blind assessment (one star)
b) Record linkage (one star)
c) Self-report
d) No description
e) Other
2) Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur
a) Yes (one star)
b) No
Indicate the median duration of follow-up and a brief rationale for the assessment above:___________________
3) Adequacy of follow-up of cohorts
a) Complete follow-up - all subjects accounted for (one star)
b) Subjects lost to follow up unlikely to introduce bias- number lost less than or equal to 20% or description of those lost suggested no different from those followed. (one star)
c) Follow up rate less than 80% and no description of those lost
d) No statement
Thresholds for converting the Newcastle-Ottawa scales to AHRQ standards (good, fair, and
poor):
Good quality: 3 or 4 stars in selection domain AND 1 or 2 stars in comparability domain AND 2 or 3 stars in outcome/exposure domain
Fair quality: 2 stars in selection domain AND 1 or 2 stars in comparability domain AND 2 or 3 stars in outcome/exposure domain
Poor quality: 0 or 1 star in selection domain OR 0 stars in comparability domain OR 0 or 1 stars in outcome/exposure domain
The content published in Cureus is the result of clinical experience and/or research by independent individuals or organizations. Cureus is not responsible for the scientific accuracy or reliability of data or conclusions published herein. All content published within Cureus is intended only for educational, research and reference purposes. Additionally, articles published within Cureus should not be deemed a suitable substitute for the advice of a qualified health care professional. Do not disregard or avoid professional medical advice due to content published within Cureus.
Footnotes
The authors have declared financial relationships, which are detailed in the next section.
Annie Young declare(s) Honoraria and educational grant from Leo Pharma, BMS/Pfizer Alliance, Chugai, Bayer. Disclosures January 2022 for last 3 years
References
- 1.Assessing risk of venous thromboembolism in the patient with cancer. Khorana AA, Connolly GC. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4839–4847. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.22.3271. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Cancer-associated thrombosis: an overview. Elyamany G, Alzahrani AM, Bukhary E. Clin Med Insights Oncol. 2014;8:129–137. doi: 10.4137/CMO.S18991. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: an underestimated major health problem. Khalil J, Bensaid B, Elkacemi H, Afif M, Bensaid Y, Kebdani T, Benjaafar N. World J Surg Oncol. 2015;13:204. doi: 10.1186/s12957-015-0592-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Venous thromboembolic disease and cancer. Fennerty A. Postgrad Med J. 2006;82:642–648. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.2006.046987. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Cancer and venous thromboembolism. Prandoni P, Falanga A, Piccioli A. Lancet Oncol. 2005;6:401–410. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(05)70207-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Venous thromboembolism in metastatic urothelial carcinoma or variant histologies: incidence, associative factors, and effect on survival. Ramos JD, Casey MF, Crabb SJ, et al. Cancer Med. 2017;6:186–194. doi: 10.1002/cam4.986. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Venous thromboembolism and effect of comorbidity in bladder cancer: A Danish nationwide cohort study of 13,809 patients diagnosed between 1995 and 2011. Ording AG, Nielsen ME, Smith AB, Horváth-Puhó E, Sørensen HT. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1078143916000478. Urol Oncol. 2016;34:292–298. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.02.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Extended outpatient chemoprophylaxis reduces venous thromboembolism after radical cystectomy. Schomburg J, Krishna S, Soubra A, Cotter K, Fan Y, Brown G, Konety B. Urol Oncol. 2018;36:77. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.09.029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Procedure-specific risks of thrombosis and bleeding in urological cancer surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Tikkinen KA, Craigie S, Agarwal A, et al. Eur Urol. 2018;73:242–251. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.03.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Reporting bias leading to discordant venous thromboembolism rates in the United States versus Non-US countries following radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fantony JJ, Gopalakrishna A, Van Noord M, Inman BA. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2405456915001406. Eur Urol Focus. 2016;2:189–196. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2015.09.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Systematic reviews of observational studies of risk of thrombosis and bleeding in urological surgery (ROTBUS): introduction and methodology. Tikkinen KA, Agarwal A, Craigie S, et al. Syst Rev. 2014;3:150. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-150. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. BMJ. 2009;339:2535. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Risk factors and timing of venous thromboembolism after radical cystectomy in routine clinical practice: a population-based study. Doiron RC, Booth CM, Wei X, Siemens DR. BJU Int. 2016;118:714–722. doi: 10.1111/bju.13443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer and its impact on surgical morbidity and oncological outcomes: a real-world experience. Nguyen TT, Huillard O, Dabi Y, Anract J, Sibony M, Zerbib M, Xylinas E. Front Surg. 2018;5:58. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2018.00058. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Venous thromboembolism and peri-operative chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a population-based study. Brennan K, Karim S, Doiron RC, Siemens DR, Booth CM. Bladder Cancer. 2018;4:419–428. doi: 10.3233/BLC-180184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Radical cystectomy in patients with disseminated disease: an assessment of perioperative outcomes using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Wallis C, Khana S, Hajiha M, Nam RK, Satkunasivam R. Can Urol Assoc J. 2017;11:244–248. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.4208. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Incidence and predictors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among ambulatory high-risk cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy in the United States. Khorana AA, Dalal M, Lin J, Connolly GC. Cancer. 2013;119:648–655. doi: 10.1002/cncr.27772. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Extended duration enoxaparin decreases the rate of venous thromboembolic events after radical cystectomy compared to inpatient only subcutaneous heparin. Pariser JJ, Pearce SM, Anderson BB, Packiam VT, Prachand VN, Smith ND, Steinberg GD. J Urol. 2017;197:302–307. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.08.090. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Incidence and risk factors for venous thromboembolism after transurethral resection of bladder tumor: a population-based analysis. Zaffuto E, Pompe R, Moschini M, et al. Eur Urol Suppl. 2017;16:468–469. [Google Scholar]
- 20.The incidence of venous thromboembolism and its effect on survival among patients with primary bladder cancer. Sandhu R, Pan CX, Wun T, Harvey D, Zhou H, White RH, Chew HK. Cancer. 2010;116:2596–2603. doi: 10.1002/cncr.25004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer - a cohort study using linked United Kingdom databases. Walker AJ, Card TR, West J, Crooks C, Grainge MJ. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:1404–1413. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.10.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Hospital Episode Statistics data analysis of postoperative venous thromboembolus in patients undergoing urological surgery: a review of 126,891 cases. Dyer J, Wyke S, Lynch C. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2013;95:65–69. doi: 10.1308/003588413X13511609956219. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.A dual-centre, cohort comparison of open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted radical cystectomy. Khan MS, Challacombe B, Elhage O, et al. Int J Clin Pract. 2012;66:656–662. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02888.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Variation in thromboembolic complications among patients undergoing commonly performed cancer operations. De Martino RR, Goodney PP, Spangler EL, et al. J Vasc Surg. 2012;55:1035–1040. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.10.129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Venous thromboembolism after major urologic oncology surgery: a focus on the incidence and timing of thromboembolic events after 27,455 operations. Alberts BD, Woldu SL, Weinberg AC, Danzig MR, Korets R, Badani KK. Urology. 2014;84:799–806. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.05.055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Mp49-07 the risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism according to the circulating tumor cell status in patients with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder treated with radical cystectomy. Soave A, Riethdorf S, Dahlem R, et al. J Urol. 2016;195:0–7. [Google Scholar]
- 27.MP2-15 identifying incidence and risk factors for VTE among cystectomy patients for bladder cancer. Vukina J, McBride A, McKibben M, et al. J Urol. 2014;191:0. [Google Scholar]
- 28.PD18-09 comparative effectiveness of prophylactic anticoagulation in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Mossanen M, Holt S, James A, Calvert J, Wright J, Gore J. J Urol. 2014;191:0. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Incidence and risk factors of venous thromboembolism after pelvic uro-oncologic surgery - a single center experience. Chen EC, Papa N, Lawrentschuk N, Bolton D, Sengupta S. BJU Int. 2016;117 Suppl 4:50–53. doi: 10.1111/bju.13238. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Temporal trends in venous thromboembolism after radical cystectomy. Lyon TD, Tollefson MK, Shah PH, et al. Urol Oncol. 2018;36:361–321. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.05.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.MP50-05 identifying practice patterns for thromboprophylaxis after radical cystectomy. Van Dlac A, Cowan N. J Urol. 2014;191:0. [Google Scholar]
- 32.Enhanced recovery protocol after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Daneshmand S, Ahmadi H, Schuckman AK, Mitra AP, Cai J, Miranda G, Djaladat H. J Urol. 2014;192:50–55. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.01.097. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Complications of radical cystectomy for nonmuscle invasive disease: comparison with muscle invasive disease. Cookson MS, Chang SS, Wells N, Parekh DJ, Smith JA, Jr Jr. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12478113/ J Urol. 2003;169:101–104. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64045-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.MP60-20 adverse outcomes following radical cystectomy. Breau R, Lavallee L, Witiuk K, et al. J Urol. 2014;191:0. [Google Scholar]
- 35.Venous thromboembolism after urological surgery. Tyson MD, Castle EP, Humphreys MR, Andrews PE. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.092. J Urol. 2014;192:793–797. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.092. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Short-term outcome after cystectomy: comparison of two different perioperative protocols. de Vries RR, Kauer P, van Tinteren H, et al. Urol Int. 2012;88:383–389. doi: 10.1159/000336155. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Does extended lymphadenectomy increase the morbidity of radical cystectomy? Brössner C, Pycha A, Toth A, Mian C, Kuber W. BJU Int. 2004;93:64–66. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2004.04557.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Pd36-10 venous thromboembolism rates following radical cystectomy stratified by method of prophylaxis. Hugen C, Stern A, Cai J, et al. J Urol. 2017;197:0. [Google Scholar]
- 39.Venous thromboembolism following radical cystectomy: significant predictors, comparison of different anticoagulants and timing of events. Sun AJ, Djaladat H, Schuckman A, Miranda G, Cai J, Daneshmand S. J Urol. 2015;193:565–569. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.08.085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Associations among age, comorbidity and clinical outcomes after radical cystectomy: results from the Alberta Urology Institute radical cystectomy database. Fairey A, Chetner M, Metcalfe J, et al. J Urol. 2008;180:128–134. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.J: 1442 burden of venothrombotic events in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. James A, Wright J, Porter M, Holt S, Gore J. J Urol. 2013;189:0. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.02.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Venous thromboembolism after radical cystectomy and urinary diversion: a single-center experience with 1737 consecutive patients. Laymon M, Harraz A, Elshal A, et al. Scand J Urol. 2019;53:392–397. doi: 10.1080/21681805.2019.1698652. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Ileocaecal vs ileal neobladder after radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer: a comparative study. Khafagy M, Shaheed FA, Moneim TA. BJU Int. 2006;97:799–804. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.05996.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Morbidity and mortality of octogenarians following open radical cystectomy using a standardized reporting system. Berneking AD, Rosevear HM, Askeland EJ, Newton MR, O'Donnell MA, Brown JA. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23930606/ Can J Urol. 2013;20:6826–6831. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Cystectomy in the ninth decade: operative results and long-term survival outcomes. Mendiola FP, Zorn KC, Gofrit ON, Mikhail AA, Orvieto MA, Msezane LP, Steinberg GD. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17784983/ Can J Urol. 2007;14:3628–3634. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Incidence, risk profile and morphological pattern of lower extremity venous thromboembolism after urological cancer surgery. Clément C, Rossi P, Aissi K, et al. J Urol. 2011;186:2293–2297. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.07.074. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Gender and age differences in blood utilization and length of stay in radical cystectomy: a population-based study. Cárdenas-Turanzas M, Cooksley C, Kamat AM, Pettaway CA, Elting LS. Int Urol Nephrol. 2008;40:893–899. doi: 10.1007/s11255-008-9351-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on pathological parameters and survival in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Caglayan A, Akbulut Z, Atmaca AF, Altinova S, Kilic M, Balbay MD. Turk J Med Sci. 2012;42:623–629. [Google Scholar]
- 49.MP04-02 long-term incidence of venous thromboembolic events following cystectomy: a population-based analysis. Wallis CJD, Magee DE, Satkunasivam R, Nam RK. Can Urol Assoc J. 2017;197:0–9. [Google Scholar]
- 50.Incidence of venous thrombosis in a large cohort of 66,329 cancer patients: results of a record linkage study. Blom JW, Vanderschoot JP, Oostindiër MJ, Osanto S, van der Meer FJ, Rosendaal FR. J Thromb Haemost. 2006;4:529–535. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01804.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Cancer-associated venous thromboembolic disease, version 1.2015. Streiff MB, Holmstrom B, Ashrani A, et al. https://jnccn.org/view/journals/jnccn/13/9/article-p1079.xml?print. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2015;13:1079–1095. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2015.0133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients undergoing abdominal and pelvic cancer surgery: adherence and compliance to ACCP guidelines in DIONYS registry. Geahchan N, Basile M, Tohmeh M. https://springerplus.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40064-016-3057-9. SpringerPlus. 2016;5:1541. doi: 10.1186/s40064-016-3057-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.High rates of venous thromboembolic events in patients undergoing systemic therapy for urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gopalakrishna A, Longo TA, Fantony JJ, Doshi U, Harrison MR, Van Noord M, Inman BA. Urol Oncol. 2016;34:407–414. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.05.009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]